Leader of the House of Lords

House of Lords: Parliamentary Procedure

Lord Stoddart of Swindon: To ask the Leader of the House what status members who are not members of the main political parties or the crossbenches have in relation to the order of speaking or asking supplementary questions.

Baroness Stowell of Beeston: The House of Lords is self-regulating. As such it is in the hands of the House to determine who it wishes to hear from when two or more members rise to speak.At question time it is my responsibility to assist the House in that respect. For debates that require a list of speakers, the final order of speaking is drawn up by the Government Whips’ Office following consultation in the usual channels. In both settings it is customary for speakers from different parties or parts of the House to take turns (see Companion to the Standing Orders, paragraph 4.25).

Foreign and Commonwealth Office

Turkey: EU Accession

Lord Morris of Aberavon: To ask Her Majesty’s Government what assessment they have made of the number of Turkish citizens likely to seek to relocate to other member states of the EU if Turkey becomes a member state.

Baroness Anelay of St Johns: No worthwhile assessment could be made ahead of much greater clarity both about the potential timescale for Turkish accession and the rules that would apply to freedom of movement of people at that time.Turkish accession is not in prospect for many years. Since the EU agreed to begin negotiations in 2004, Turkey has concluded one of the 35 chapters of the negotiations.All decisions about the accession of a new member to the EU require the unanimous agreement of all existing members. In addition, any accession to the EU would under the EU Act 2011 need to be ratified by Act of Parliament. The Government’s policy is not to agree to a new member joining the EU until arrangements have been put in place to ensure that further enlargement does not lead to a large-scale movement of people.

EU Enlargement

Lord Stoddart of Swindon: To ask Her Majesty’s Government whether free movement of people and capital would apply to all applicant countries to the EU should they become member states.

Baroness Anelay of St Johns: Free Movement of People and Capital are covered under the EU acquis, (primarily in Chapters 2 and 4), as part of the accession process of any new Member State. However Article 49 of the Treaty on EU makes clear that the EU and the applicant state will agree the conditions of admission and any adjustment to the treaties ahead of a candidate country joining the EU. As a result transitional controls have been introduced to the Free Movement of Workers. In their current form, these transitional controls allow a Member State the option of delaying the implementation of free movement for a maximum of seven years after the date of accession. The Government is seeking to reform these measures as set out in the 22 February 2016 White Paper “The Best of Both Worlds: the United Kingdom’s Special Status in a Reformed European Union”, and the Prime Minister, my Rt Hon. Friend the Member for Witney (Mr Cameron), has made it clear that we will not agree to further enlargement taking place before such reforms have been agreed and implemented.All decisions about the accession of a new member to the EU require unanimous agreement of all existing members. In addition, any accession to the EU would under the EU Act 2011 need to be ratified by Act of Parliament.

USA: Official Visits

Lord Blencathra: To ask Her Majesty’s Government whether President Obama's planned official visit to the UK was at the initiation of the White House or them.

Baroness Anelay of St Johns: We can confirm that President Obama has accepted an invitation to have a private lunch with Her Majesty The Queen, and that he will also meet the Prime Minister, my Rt Hon. Friend the Member for Witney (Mr Cameron), when he visits the UK in April. This will be President Obama’s fifth official visit to the UK. The US remains our most important bilateral ally. It is entirely in keeping with the nature of the Special Relationship that President Obama would wish to visit the UK in the final year of his Presidency, as did President George W Bush in 2008.

El Salvador: Human Rights

Baroness Hooper: To ask Her Majesty’s Government what steps they are taking, in terms of financial aid and technical assistance, to help reduce violence, to protect the rights of women, and to prevent human rights abuses, in El Salvador.

Baroness Anelay of St Johns: The British Government strongly supports the promotion of women’s rights and the prevention of human rights abuses in El Salvador. We regularly raise human rights issues with the Salvadoran government. We publicly urged El Salvador to review its laws regarding abortion during it's Universal Periodic Review in 2014. We have recommended improvements to the treatment of women who have had abortions or miscarriages and continue to raise this issue with the Government of El Salvador.Our Embassy works closely with UN Agencies and non-governmental organisations (NGOs) on projects aimed at protecting human rights and reducing violence. We funded a workshop for women from violent or at risk neighbourhoods, run by local NGO Vital Voices. Participants learned entrepreneurial skills to help obtain economic independence and escape their violent environments. We have also funded a UN Children's Emergency Fund project to protect children in El Salvador from sexual violence and online exploitation under the Home Office WeProtect programme. In February, we funded police training in internal investigation which focussed on limiting malpractice including human rights violations.We would welcome a visit to El Salvador by members of interested All-Party Parliamentary Groups to see and discuss these and other issues at first hand.

Sudan: Human Rights

Lord Chidgey: To ask Her Majesty’s Government what representations they are making to the government of Sudan concerning the recent raid by Sudan’s National Intelligence and Security Services on civil society actors at the Tracks offices in Khartoum.

Baroness Anelay of St Johns: An official based at our Embassy in Khartoum raised this specific case directly with the Director for Human Rights at the Sudanese Ministry of Foreign Affairs last week. More broadly, we continue to highlight our concerns about the freedom of civil society organisations as part of our ongoing human rights dialogue with the Government of Sudan.

South Sudan: Armed Conflict

The Marquess of Lothian: To ask Her Majesty’s Government what action they plan to take in the light of the recent report by the Office of the UNHCR detailing atrocities committed against civilians, particularly women, in the civil war in South Sudan; whether the Responsibility to Protect policy applies in that case; and if so, how it will be applied.

Baroness Anelay of St Johns: The UK is deeply concerned by the findings of the recent UN Office of the High Commissioner for Human Rights report. The Responsibility to Protect was agreed by all UN member states; it imposes an obligation on all states to protect their populations, and for the international community to assist. Due to the severity of the situation in South Sudan we are taking action on multiple levels. We are raising our serious concerns directly with the government, encouraging the African Union to establish the Hybrid Court for South Sudan, and pressing the UN Security Council to agree an arms embargo. At the UN Human Rights Council we are pressing for a UN Special Rapporteur to be agreed.

Eritrea: Human Rights

Baroness Kinnock of Holyhead: To ask Her Majesty’s Government what assessment they have made of claims that Eritrean children are fleeing from their country because of human rights violations or crimes against humanity.

Baroness Anelay of St Johns: The Government is deeply concerned by reports that over 3000 unaccompanied minors from Eritrea make the dangerous journey to Europe every year. A number of factors lead to both adults and children leaving Eritrea. These include a mix of economic pressures, a lack of opportunity, and the country’s poor human rights record. The UK remains deeply concerned about the human rights situation inside Eritrea. We have stepped up our engagement with the Government of Eritrea and made clear we want to see concrete action to improve respect for human rights. In addition, through the UK chaired EU/African Union “Khartoum Process”, we are working with African Partners to tackle the smuggling and trafficking networks that exploit these vulnerable children.

Eritrea: Human Rights

Baroness Kinnock of Holyhead: To ask Her Majesty’s Government what actions they are taking with regard to claims that Eritreans face human rights violations, in the light of the report by the UN Commission of Enquiry on human rights in Eritrea in June 2015 which concluded that the government of Eritrea engages in abuses that occur in a "context of a total lack of rule of law" and that it "is not law that rules Eritreans, but fear".

Baroness Anelay of St Johns: The UK recognises the important work of the UN Commission of Inquiry and is concerned by their findings on Eritrea. In particular we are concerned by reports of arbitrary detention, and shortcomings in the rule of law and respect for fundamental freedoms. At the Human Rights Council in July 2015, we supported an extension of the Commission’s mandate so that it could continue its work. Bilaterally and through the Human Rights Council we have made clear we want the Government of Eritrea to take concrete action to improve respect for human rights and the rule of law. We have also called on Eritrea to engage fully in Article 8 Dialogue with the EU and cooperate with UN human rights bodies. In May 2015 the Eritrean government announced it would reform the civil, criminal and penal codes. The EU is currently providing funding to help reform local community courts in Eritrea to improve access to justice. The project is working with local community courts to put the reforms of May 2015 into practice.

Rohingya

Baroness Kinnock of Holyhead: To ask Her Majesty’s Government what is their latest assessment of the situation of the Rohingya.

Baroness Anelay of St Johns: UK officials frequently visit Rakhine State and receive regular reports about the situation of the Rohingya, which remains of grave concern. The Rohingya continue to suffer from severe restrictions on their freedom of movement, on their access to livelihoods, schools, healthcare and places of worship. The disenfranchisement of the community in the November election and removal of white card identity documents have further compounded the denial of the most basic rights of the community.Addressing Rakhine and the persecution of the Rohingya community will be a pressing challenge for the incoming government in Burma. We will continue to work with the new administration on addressing the human rights violations carried out against the Rohingya. The UK is one of the largest bilateral donors to Rakhine providing over £18 million in humanitarian aid since 2012, including an additional £6.2 million in 2015/16.

Burma: Sexual Offences

Baroness Kinnock of Holyhead: To ask Her Majesty’s Government whether they will call for an end to impunity for rape and other forms of sexual violence in Burma.

Baroness Anelay of St Johns: We have repeatedly called for an end to impunity for rape and other forms of sexual violence in Burma. We are focused on practical action to tackle these issues and are persistent in applying pressure to the Burmese government to live up to the commitments it made when it endorsed the Declaration of Commitment to End Sexual Violence in Conflict at the London Global Summit in June 2014. We will maintain that approach and raise this issue with the new Burmese government at the earliest opportunity.During his visit to Burma in July 2015, the Minister of State for Foreign and Commonwealth Affairs, my Rt Hon. Friend the Member for East Devon (Mr Swire), pressed the Burmese government at Senior Ministerial level on the issue. He also launched the International Protocol on the Documentation and Investigation of Sexual Violence. We continue to raise the issue in international fora, including through UN resolutions on Burma at the General Assembly and the Human Rights Council which we co-sponsor.

Burma: Sexual Offences

Baroness Kinnock of Holyhead: To ask Her Majesty’s Government whether they will call for the inclusion of women in the peace negotiations between the government of Burma and the ethnic armed political groups to ensure that the issue of rape and sexual violence in conflict is properly addressed.

Baroness Anelay of St Johns: We are clear that women should have a critical role in the Burmese peace process, not only to ensure that the use of sexual violence is addressed but also so that women’s voices are heard in what is a key element of the country’s transition to peace and democracy. Several lead negotiators are women, including the head of the Senior Delegation of Ethnic leaders, Naw Zipporah Sein, and we encourage all sides to ensure equitable representation in the peace process. We welcome the inclusion of explicit provisions in the National Ceasefire Agreement, signed last October, prohibiting, ‘...any form of sexual attack on women, including sexual molestation, sexual assault or violence, rape and sex slavery’.

Burma: Sexual Offences

Baroness Kinnock of Holyhead: To ask Her Majesty’s Government whether they will consider providing funding to the Women's League of Burma and its members to support ongoing work documenting cases of rape and providing support for victims of sexual violence.

Baroness Anelay of St Johns: The UK has previously provided funding support to the Women’s League of Burma, including towards the publication of some of their research into sexual violence in Burma. The organisation is invited to contact our Embassy in Rangoon directly if they have specific requests for future support.

Department for Education

Teachers: Labour Turnover

Lord Ouseley: To ask Her Majesty’s Government how many teachers have left the profession during the past three years and whether those teachers have been replaced by fully qualified teachers or teaching assistants.

Lord Nash: The Department publishes statistics showing the number and rate of qualified teachers who enter service and the number and rate of qualified teachers leaving service.The latest available statistics, for 2011 to 2014, are in Table C1b of the additional tables in the statistical first release ‘School Workforce in England, November 2014’, which was published in July 2015 and has been attached to this answer.The statistics show that the qualified teacher entry rate has been higher than the qualified teacher leavers rate throughout 2011 to 2014. For example, the latest data shows that between November 2013 and November 2014, 44,900 full-time equivalent qualified teachers entered service in state-funded schools; this represents an entry rate of 10.3%. Over the same period, 42,050 full-time equivalent qualified teachers left service from state-funded schools; this represents a leavers rate of 9.7%It is the responsibility of individual head teachers to decide how best to deploy their staff to meet the needs of their pupils.



Qualified_teachers_entering_and_leaving_service
(PDF Document, 23.58 KB)

Children's Play

Baroness Garden of Frognal: To ask Her Majesty’s Government what assessment they have made of the proposal in the report from the charity Sense, Making the case for play, that play be instated as part of the ministerial brief for the Parliamentary Under Secretary of State for Education and Childcare.

Lord Nash: I refer my Rt Hon. Friend to the answer given on 8 March to PQ 29735, which I have also set out below:The Department for Education recognises that play has an important role in supporting all young children to develop and prepare for later learning. The importance of play is already recognised within the early years legislation covered by Parliamentary Under-Secretary of State for Childcare and Education’s portfolio. Play is covered in the statutory Early Years Foundation Stage framework and states: “Each area of learning and development must be implemented through planned, purposeful play and through a mix of adult-led and child-initiated activity.” Staff working in early years settings as Early Years Educators (level 3) and Early Years Teachers (graduates) are required to have an understanding of different pedagogical approaches, including the role of play in supporting early learning and development. The criteria for the Early Years Educator and standards for Early Years Teacher Status qualifications are set by the department. However, it is the responsibility of early years settings to provide play opportunities for their children and pupils, including those with special educational needs and disabilities. Ofsted registers childcare provision on the Early Years Register and the General Childcare Register and conducts a regular cycle of inspection to ensure that provision meets the required quality and safety standards. In judging the quality and standards of early years provision, Ofsted inspectors must assess the extent to which the learning and care provided by the setting meets the needs of the range of children who attend, including the needs of any children who have special educational needs or disabilities. At August 2015, 85 per cent of providers on the Early Years Register were rated good or outstanding for overall effectiveness. This is an increase of 11 percentage points since 2012.

Children's Play

Baroness Garden of Frognal: To ask Her Majesty’s Government what assessment they have made of the case for highlighting play as a key strand of the Government’s policy on parenting and life chances.

Lord Nash: I refer my Rt Hon. Friend to the answer given on 9 March to PQ 29736, which I have also set out below:The Department for Education recognises that play has an important role in supporting all young children to develop and prepare for later learning. Play is integral in the early years and is covered in the statutory Early Years Foundation Stage framework which states: “Play is essential for children’s development, building their confidence as they learn to explore, to think about problems, and relate to others.” The framework is attached [for your attention]. The Government’s forthcoming Life Chances Strategy will set out a comprehensive plan to fight disadvantage and extend opportunity. Within this, we are considering how we can support early years and parenting to give children the best start in life.



Statutory_framework_early_years_foundation_stage
(PDF Document, 236.24 KB)

Young People: Education

Lord Smith of Leigh: To ask Her Majesty’s Government how they will secure the skills necessary for students and businesses, and the improved productivity for the economy, given the pattern of delivery for 16–19 year olds through School Sixth Forms, Sixth Form Colleges and Further Education Colleges.

Lord Nash: We are ensuring that all 16-19 education institutions provide high quality academic and technical education through reforming A Levels and technical qualifications so that our standards match the best education systems in the world. A Levels are now linear, allowing more time for teaching and learning, and all approved technical qualifications now meet rigorous standards and are backed by employers. We are planning further reforms to technical education to simplify the 16+ skills system by providing clear progression routes into employment. These reforms will ensure that young people gain the skills and knowledge required by employers and universities. The government will verify that post-16 provision is meeting the current and future needs of learners and employers by means of area reviews, which will be based on the best available evidence, including mapping current curriculum provision and the travel to learn patterns that show how all learners currently access learning. These area reviews will create a stronger educational offer whilst also ensuring there is a high quality and financially resilient set of colleges in each area of England. They will also show the role technology is playing, and help to improve understanding of the quality and relative costs of provision and the financial implications of potential options.

Teachers: Training

Lord Addington: To ask Her Majesty’s Government whether the announced changes to the initial teacher training criteria run parallel to the proposed recommendations of the Department for Education's independent expert group led by Stephen Munday.

Lord Nash: The initial teacher training (ITT) criteria and accompanying supporting advice do not prescribe the content of ITT. Providers must ensure that programmes are designed to enable trainee teachers to meet the Teachers’ Standards at the appropriate level. The National College for Teaching and Leadership (NCTL) published an updated version of the ITT Criteria, which combined the statutory guidance and supporting advice into a single document to improve clarity. Some routine and minor amendments were made to the supporting advice to assist ITT providers. These related to safeguarding arrangements, middle years programmes, and secondary subjects that are typically offered in schools in only one Key Stage. NCTL also included advice for ITT providers on the Government’s Prevent strategy. The Government is awaiting the report from Stephen Munday’s independent expert group which is due shortly and will consider how their recommendations will be taken forward.

Teachers: Training

Lord Addington: To ask Her Majesty’s Government, in the light of the announced changes to the initial teacher training criteria, why the suggested content was not made compulsory.

Lord Nash: The initial teacher training (ITT) criteria document contains both statutory guidance and accompanying advice from the National College for Teaching and Leadership (NCTL). Accredited ITT providers must have regard to the statutory guidance when carrying out their duties relating to ITT. The criteria are made under The Education (School Teachers’ Qualifications) (England) Regulations 2003 (S.I. 2003/1662). They set out criteria which providers must ensure that candidates meet when they seek to gain a training place, and programme design, management and quality assurance criteria that must be met by those ITT providers in the design and delivery of their programmes. There are criteria specific to employment-based ITT routes. The accompanying advice is designed to help training providers understand and interpret the statutory criteria. Ofsted uses the supporting advice when it inspects ITT providers under the relevant initial teacher education framework for inspection. The content of ITT is not specified by the criteria and supporting advice, except that providers must ensure that programmes are designed to enable trainee teachers to be assessed as meeting the relevant standards (the Teachers’ Standards). No changes have been made to the ITT criteria recently; the last change was made in June 2015 (Criterion C2.2). This removed the previously specified age ranges, allowing providers greater scope to work with schools to determine the age range that their programmes would be designed to cover, within the specified primary, middle, and secondary phases. On 16 March, NCTL combined the statutory guidance and supporting advice into a single document to improve clarity. Some routine and minor amendments were made to the supporting advice to assist ITT providers. These related to safeguarding arrangements, middle years programmes, and secondary subjects that are typically offered in schools in only one Key Stage. NCTL also included advice for ITT providers on the Government’s Prevent strategy.

The Lord Chairman of Committees

House of Lords: Facilities

Lord Palmer: To ask the Chairman of Committees who sanctioned the change of use of the Peers' TV Room and whether it is envisaged that an alternative facility will be made available to members.

Lord Laming: The Accommodation Steering Group (comprising the Chairman of Committees, Government Chief Whip, Opposition Accommodation Whip, Liberal Democrat Chief Whip and Convenor of the Crossbench Peers) decided in July that that the Peers’ TV Room (on the Committee Corridor) should be converted into additional hot-desk space, initially for use by new Members. That decision was reported to the Administration and Works Committee, and was recorded in Red Benches and the Committee’s published minutes.There are no plans to provide an alternative facility. I feel sure that Noble Lords will agree that limited space must be used efficiently to enable the House and its members to carry out their parliamentary functions effectively.

Ministry of Defence

Armed Forces: Finance

Lord West of Spithead: To ask Her Majesty’s Government, following the 2015 Strategic Defence and Security Review, how much extra money was made available for (1) the Royal Navy, (2) the army, and (3) the Royal Airforce, in 2016–17 and 2017–18.

Earl Howe: The Royal Navy, Army and Royal Air Force operate as fully integrated joint organisations where elements work closely together sharing land, buildings and facilities, and sometimes equipment. The enhancements made in the Strategic Defence and Security Review (SDSR) reflect their consequent integrated budgetary structure. The Spending Review 2015 set out plans to fund the SDSR, and confirms the Ministry of Defence (MOD) budget settlement from 2016-17 to 2020-21. The Government has committed to increasing the MOD budget by 0.5 per cent above inflation over the course of this Parliament, and has ensured access to £2.1 billion from the new Joint Security Fund. We will spend £178 billion on equipment and equipment support over the next decade, £12 billion more than previously planned. This money will be spent on priorities identified by the SDSR, including: Two additional Typhoon squadrons and an additional squadron of F-35 Lightning II combat aircraft to operate from our new aircraft carriers. Nine new Maritime Patrol Aircraft, based in Scotland, to protect our nuclear deterrent, hunt down hostile submarines and enhance our maritime search and rescue capability. Two new Strike Brigades of up to 5,000 personnel fully equipped to deploy rapidly and sustain themselves in the field. The precise costs of delivering these priorities will depend upon the associated contractual arrangements.

Navy: Finance

Lord West of Spithead: To ask Her Majesty’s Government whether there is sufficient funding in the navy budget to enable full manning, provision of spares and logistics support, and the appropriate training necessary for the new ships, aircraft and equipment being delivered to the Royal Navy in the next five years.

Earl Howe: As set out in the Strategic Defence and Security Review, Spending Review 2015 provided the investment necessary to deliver the most modern navy in the world. This programme has sufficient funding in the budget to enable full manning, provision of spares and logistics support, and appropriate training for the next five years.

Warships

Lord West of Spithead: To ask Her Majesty’s Government whether, under the plans following the Strategic Defence and Security Review 2015, there will be more or fewer Royal Navy ships in commission by 2025 than the 57 currently.

Earl Howe: The 2015 Strategic and Defence Security Review announced that we will maintain our fleet of 19 frigates and destroyers whilst also conducting a concept phase assessment for the design and build of a new class of lighter, flexible general purpose frigate. This will mean that by the 2030s we can further increase the total number of frigates and destroyers. Joint Force 2025 will also include three replacement solid support ships, the two new Queen Elizabeth class aircraft carriers and at least two new offshore patrol vessels. Our national shipbuilding strategy, which we will publish later this year, will inform our plans.

Department for Environment, Food and Rural Affairs

Plastics: Seas and Oceans

Baroness Parminter: To ask Her Majesty’s Government what assessment they have made of the impact of microplastics from toiletries and detergents on aquatic life.

Lord Gardiner of Kimble: Microplastics from cosmetic products make up a very small percentage of the total of microplastics entering the marine environment, with estimates ranging from 0.01% to 4.1%. Defra has funded a project, undertaken by the University of Plymouth, to study the effects of microplastics in the marine environment. The project studied whether chemical pollutants stick to plastic particles, whether marine organisms ingest plastic particles and pass them along the food chain, and whether the plastics themselves, or associated chemical pollutants, could cause harm to those organisms. The final report for this project is currently undergoing peer review.

Flour: Additives

Lord Birt: To ask Her Majesty’s Government whether they will consider exempting traditional windmills producing high-quality artisan flours from any obligations to introduce additives.

Lord Gardiner of Kimble: In the UK iron, niacin and thiamin are added back by law to all UK milled flour (except wholemeal) to restore nutrients lost in milling. Flour milled in the UK is also fortified with calcium to reduce the risk of calcium deficiency, a condition associated with poor bone health and osteoporosis. The Government is currently considering requests to exempt certain minor flour uses from these mandatory fortification requirements. This exercise could be extended to consider exempting traditional stoneground mills producing low volumes of flour should a case be made.

Home Office

Asylum

Lord Green of Deddington: To ask Her Majesty’s Government how many third country nationals have been transferred to the UK from other EU member states under (1) Article 8, (2) Article 9, and (3) Article 10, of the Dublin Regulations for their asylum cases to be heard by the UK authorities in each of the years for which data are available, and from which EU member state those individuals came.

Lord Bates: Data on cases progressed under the Dublin Convention is recorded on the main immigration database. However, this data is not currently available in the form requested as it is not held in a way that allows it to be reported on automatically.

Asylum

Lord Green of Deddington: To ask Her Majesty’s Government how many asylum seekers have been transferred from the UK to other EU member states under the Dublin Regulations owing to (1) family reasons (Articles 8, 9 and 10), and (2) irregular entry (Article 13.1), in each of the years for which data are available.

Lord Bates: Data is available from 2007. In those years there have been no transfers to other EU member states under the Dublin Regulations owing to family reasons (Articles 8, 9 and 10). The table below indicates those years and numbers where we have transferred cases for reasons of Irregular Entry (Article 13.1)Year of ReturnReturns201420201575

Asylum: EU Law

Baroness Jowell: To ask Her Majesty’s Government what have been the most common three grounds for refusing a take charge request since Dublin III came into force.

Lord Bates: The Dublin III Regulation came into force on 1 January 2014. The 3 most common reasons for the refusal of take charge requests by the UK have been Articles 6.5 and 8 (both of which relate to the legal presence of a qualified relative of the minor in another Member State) and Article12.4 (which requires the Member State to take charge following the expiry of certain residence and entry visas).

Offences against Children: Rotherham

Lord Ahmed: To ask Her Majesty’s Government whether they intend to investigate further the allegations of child sexual exploitation in Rotherham as covered by the Jay Report to establish more precisely the number of children involved.

Lord Bates: Professor Alexis Jay’s report into child sexual exploitation in Rotherham provided a terrible account of the appalling failures by the Council, the police and other agencies to protect vulnerable children. Following publication of the Jay report the Chief Constable of South Yorkshire Police, David Crompton, asked the National Crime Agency (NCA) to carry out an independent investigation into child sexual exploitation in Rotherham over the period covered by the Jay report (1997-2013). In response the NCA launched Operation Stovewood which has three priorities. They are to deliver a victim-focused investigation, to work to identify and bring all offenders to justice and, thirdly, to work with partners and help to build confidence in local agencies. Operation Stovewood is ongoing and has a number of designated suspects and hundreds more potential suspects still to investigate.

HM Treasury

Social Security Benefits: EU Nationals

Lord Turnberg: To ask Her Majesty’s Government, further to the Written Answer by Lord O’Neill of Gatley on 17 February (HL5889), whether they intend to collect data on the payments made to EU immigrants for their children living in their home countries.

Lord O'Neill of Gatley: Around 7m people are receiving Child Benefit. To extract and collate the value of all payments made to EU migrants for children living outside the UK in the format requested could only be provided at disproportionate cost. Information relating to the number of Child Benefit claims paid to families with children living overseas is available in the Government publication , “The best of both worlds: the United Kingdom's special status in a reformed European Union”. This publication is available on Gov.uk

Alcoholic Drinks: Misuse

Baroness Hayter of Kentish Town: To ask Her Majesty’s Government what assessment they have made of the health impact, in terms of hospitalisations and deaths, of ending the alcohol duty escalator.

Lord O'Neill of Gatley: The Government published its assessment of the impacts of changes to alcohol duties in the Tax Information and Impact Notes alongside the Budget document in 2013 and 2014. This information is available on the gov.uk website.

Cider: Excise Duties

Baroness Hayter of Kentish Town: To ask Her Majesty’s Government, in the light of the Institute of Fiscal Studies' recent argument in favour of "reforming cider duties so that they are no longer extremely low for strong products", set out in the IFS Green Budget: February 2016, what action HM Treasury intends to take on strong, cheap cider.

Lord O'Neill of Gatley: The government amended the definition of cider, reducing the scope to products with a minimum of 35% apple or pear juice, to tackle the cheapest ciders. The government has since created 20 Local Alcohol Action Areas with the aim of reducing alcohol health and crime harms by encouraging partnerships between industry, local agencies and the voluntary sector.The government is also helping tackle irresponsible alcohol consumption. For example, Local Councils have been given the ability to collect a Late Night Levy from alcohol retailers to contribute towards the cost of policing.

Credit: Interest Rates

Lord Stevenson of Balmacara: To ask Her Majesty’s Government, in the light of the lack of affordable credit supply reported by StepChange in its figures of 9 March, what work they are doing with banks and community lenders to introduce a scheme of low- or no-interest loans, similar to the Good Shepherd initiative in Australia.

Lord O'Neill of Gatley: The Government is committed to facilitating sustainable financial services that give consumers greater choice in accessing credit. It has already introduced several initiatives to support the Credit Union sector. These include investing £38m in the sector through the Department of Work and Pensions’ Credit Union Expansion Project, providing £500,000 to help armed forces personnel access credit union services, ensuring that universal credit and pensions payments can be paid into any Credit Union account, and changing legislation to allow credit unions to admit corporate members. Additionally, the Government has provided £650,000 to fund the Archbishop of Canterbury’s Task Group on Affordable Credit’s ‘LifeSavers’ project. This project forms partnerships between primary schools and local credit unions, raising awareness of the credit union movement and encouraging more junior savers to become members. This was announced in the Prime Ministers ‘Life Chances’ speech on 11 January.

Credit: Interest Rates

Lord Stevenson of Balmacara: To ask Her Majesty’s Government what they are doing to ensure that the Financial Conduct Authority raises standards in the consumer credit market by requiring that all firms stress test their products and lending decisions against the needs of vulnerable borrowers so that credit is used in an affordable and sustainable way.

Lord O'Neill of Gatley: The Government has fundamentally reformed regulation of the consumer credit market, transferring regulatory responsibility from the Office of Fair Trading (OFT) to the Financial Conduct Authority (FCA) on 1 April 2014. The FCA requires lenders to treat all their customers fairly, and provides examples of good practice in identifying and interacting with vulnerable customers. The FCA has also turned key elements of the OFT’s Irresponsible Lending Guidance into binding rules that are based on the principle that money should only be lent to a consumer if they can afford to repay it. These rules set out that a firm should assess the customer’s creditworthiness, having regard to:the potential for the commitments to impact adversely on the consumer’s financial situation, andthe consumer’s ability to make repayments as they fall due. The Government has ensured that the FCA has robust powers to protect consumers and it has a broad enforcement toolkit to punish breaches of its rules; there is no limit on the fines it can levy.

Cabinet Office

Iraq Committee of Inquiry

Lord Stoddart of Swindon: To ask Her Majesty’s Government whether they will make representations to Sir John Chilcot to encourage him to publish his report before 23 June 2016.

Lord Bridges of Headley: In his letter of 28 October 2015 to the Prime Minister, Sir John Chilcot said that he hopes to be in a position to agree a publication date for his report in June or July of this year. The timing of publication is a matter for the independent Inquiry.



Attachment 2
(PDF Document, 263.36 KB)




Attachment
(PDF Document, 31.52 KB)

Department of Health

Alcoholic Drinks: Misuse

Lord Chadlington: To ask Her Majesty’s Government, in the light of the UK Chief Medical Officers' alcohol guidelines review, what steps they are taking to educate young people about the dangers of drinking.

Lord Prior of Brampton: Public Health England’s Rise Above social marketing programme aims to reduce the uptake of risky behaviours, including alcohol consumption, by young people aged 11-16. It teaches them the skills required to make better decisions in ‘risky’ situations to delay and prevent them from engaging in exploratory behaviours.Talk to FRANK is a web-based information service that explains the effects and risks of excessive alcohol consumption. It also provides a help service via phone, text, live chat and email for people who are concerned about their own or others’ alcohol consumption. Talk to FRANK is an independent Government funded programme. The Government also commissions the Alcohol and Drug Education and Prevention Information Service to enable schools to understand and implement evidence-based approaches to preventing harmful alcohol use by children and young people. In the new science curriculum, there are opportunities for young people to be taught about the dangers of drinking: for example, at key stage 2, pupils should be taught to “recognise the impact of diet, exercise, drugs and lifestyle on the way their bodies function”, or in biology at key stage 3, where pupils will learn about “the effects of recreational drugs (including substance misuse) on behaviour, health and life processes”.

Pregnancy: Alcoholic Drinks

Lord Chadlington: To ask Her Majesty’s Government what steps they are taking to educate women on alcohol avoidance whilst pregnant.

Lord Prior of Brampton: On 8 January 2016, the United Kingdom Chief Medical Officers published a new guideline on pregnancy and drinking – that if a woman is pregnant or planning a pregnancy, the safest approach is not to drink alcohol at all, to keep risks to the baby to a minimum. A copy of the guideline is attached. The Department will be working with the Royal College of Midwives and the Royal College of Obstetrics and Gynaecology to ensure that their members are fully informed about the content of the guidelines and are able to explain them to the women they care for and help them make informed decisions. Public Health England (PHE) is also working with professional organisations to enhance the awareness and confidence of midwives and health visitors to educate and inform women about avoiding alcohol while pregnant. PHE's Start4Life social marketing programme delivers advice and practical guidance to parents and parents to be to help them adopt healthy behaviours and build parenting skills to give their child the best possible start. This includes looking after their own health, and addresses the implications of drinking during pregnancy. Start4Life uses a range of products to inform and influence its audience's behaviour around alcohol consumption including the Information Service for Parents, Start4Life website, and leaflets and posters. Through voluntary actions by alcohol producers, independent research showed that in 2014 90.7% of bottles and cans carried warning labels about drinking in pregnancy, compared to just 17.6% of products six years before.  



UK CMO alcohol guidance
(PDF Document, 549.13 KB)

Sugar: Taxation

Lord Scriven: To ask Her Majesty’s Government, further to the Written Answer by Lord Prior of Brampton on 10 March (HL6471), when they were informed of the NHS England plan to introduce a sugar tax on its premises by 2020.

Lord Scriven: To ask Her Majesty’s Government, further to the Written Answer by Lord Prior of Brampton on 10 March (HL6471), what specific advice they were asked for before NHS England announced its plan to introduce a sugar tax on its premises by 2020.

Lord Scriven: To ask Her Majesty’s Government, further to the Written Answer by Lord Prior of Brampton on 10 March (HL6471), whether the Secretary of State for Health or any other Minister was made aware of NHS England’s plan to introduce a sugar tax on its premises by 2020 before it was made public; if so, which Ministers were made aware; when they were made aware; and what was the reasoning for the Secretary of State or Minister being informed.

Lord Prior of Brampton: We have a range of conversations about key issues at Ministerial and official level with NHS England. NHS England is independent and the decision on a sugar levy on the National Health Service estate is a matter for them operationally. We are interested to see the results of their consultation on a sugar levy. The Childhood Obesity Strategy will be published in the summer.

Human Embryo Experiments

Lord Alton of Liverpool: To ask Her Majesty’s Government, further to the Written Answer by Lord Prior of Brampton on 8 March (HL6323), how licence conditions R18-R27 and T97 have been specifically reflected in the patient information and consent forms submitted to the Human Fertilisation and Embryology Authority by the person responsible in order to perform genome editing in human embryos by means of CRISPR-Cas9.

Lord Prior of Brampton: The Human Fertilisation and Embryology Authority (HFEA) has advised that it carried out an audit of the patient information relating to the research project involving genome editing against the requirements of R19 and R20. T97 is not relevant, as it refers to the use of embryos in training, not research. The audit was completed as part of the inspection and feedback provided to the person responsible during the inspection. An assessment was made against the other licence conditions referred to during the inspection. The HFEA does not interpret the requirements to mean that each specific technique that might be used in the research must be specified in the patient information. In this case, the patient information, which is not yet finalised, makes it clear that genes may be altered but does not specifically refer to CRISPR-Cas9.

Human Embryo Experiments

Lord Alton of Liverpool: To ask Her Majesty’s Government, further to the Written Answers by Lord Prior of Brampton on 7 March (HL6225) and 8 March (HL6323), and the letter from the Chief Executive of the Human Fertilisation and Embryology Authority (HFEA) to both Lord Alton of Liverpool and the Department of Health on 7 March, whether there are any principled reasons why copies of the patient information and consent forms submitted to the HFEA by the person responsible in order to perform genome editing in human embryos by means of CRISPR-Cas9 have not yet been made publicly available; if so, what those reasons are; and if not, when they will place those documents in the Library of the House.

Lord Prior of Brampton: The Human Fertilisation and Embryology Authority (HFEA) has advised that it is has no objections to these documents being placed in the Library. While licence applications and associated documents are not routinely placed in the public domain, inspection reports relating to licence renewal applications and the minutes of the licensing Committee’s decision, which contain lay summaries, are published on the HFEA’s website. Licence applications may contain third party personal information. On this occasion, a copy of the research licence application and associated documents is attached with third party personal information redacted.



Research Licence Application
(PDF Document, 3.91 MB)

Human Embryo Experiments

Lord Alton of Liverpool: To ask Her Majesty’s Government, further to the Written Answers by Earl Howe on 22 January 2013 (WA194–5) and by the Parliamentary Under-Secretary for the Department of Health, Mr George Freeman, on 8 March (HC29426), what control the Human Fertilisation and Embryology Authority (HFEA) has over the contents of any external website, such as that maintained by the Francis Crick Institute; what prior examples they can provide in which (1) either centre 0157 or 0206, or (2) any other licensed centre, has immediately and voluntarily altered the publication on their websites of clinical success rate data or information on costs in response to a request from the HFEA to do so; and what assessment they have made of how any expectations that licensed centres would comply with such requests might be affected by the Francis Crick Institute’s claim that it is exempt from the Freedom of Information Act 2000 as a private body that has hitherto not provided copies of the patient information and consent forms directly for that reason.

Lord Prior of Brampton: The Human Fertilisation and Embryology Authority (HFEA) Code of Practice, at section 4.5, sets out the obligations on a licensed treatment centre regarding information provided on its website; other relevant marketing communications; and in relation to associated satellite and transport centres. This is in line with the Advertising Standards Authority Code. This guidance does not apply to licensed research centres.Assessment of the websites of licensed treatment centres is made during inspections undertaken by the HFEA, or in response to ad hoc instances where information has come to us suggesting breaches of these requirements. There have been a number of examples where clinics have voluntarily and immediately amended the content of their websites and it would not be proportionate to set out all such examples. The HFEA has no statutory powers relating to the costs of treatment.The fact that the Francis Crick Institute is exempt from the Freedom of Information Act 2000 has no impact on the HFEA’s expectations of licensed centres’ websites.

Human Embryo Experiments

Lord Alton of Liverpool: To ask Her Majesty’s Government, further to the Written Answers by Lord Prior of Brampton on 2 February (HL5773) and 7 March (HL6225), whether the previously licensed research to perform genome editing in human embryos by means of CRISPR-Cas9 has commenced; if so, when that research actually commenced and when the Human Fertilisation and Embryology Authority (HFEA) received evidence of ethics approval; if not, how the HFEA has confirmed that the newly approved activities have not already commenced prior to receipt of evidence of ethics approval; and whether the delay due to the absence of evidence of ethics approval has applied only to genome editing or also to all activities previously covered by the same licence.

Lord Prior of Brampton: The Human Fertilisation and Embryology Authority (HFEA) has advised that the research referred to by the Noble Lord has not commenced. When ethics approval has been received, the person responsible is required to provide evidence of this to the HFEA. The ethics approval applies to new activities in the research project, including the use of CRISPR-Cas9.

Health Services: Cambridgeshire

Lord Hunt of Kings Heath: To ask Her Majesty’s Government whether their review of the Cambridgeshire and Peterborough Clinical Commissioning Group (CCG) contract with UnitingCare LLP for older people's and adult community services will consider the role and advice given to the CCG by the Strategic Projects Team.

Lord Hunt of Kings Heath: To ask Her Majesty’s Government how they will ensure that their review of the Cambridgeshire and Peterborough Clinical Commissioning Group contract with UnitingCare LLP for older people's and adult community services will deal objectively with the role of the Strategic Projects Team.

Lord Prior of Brampton: NHS England is responsible for the review of Cambridgeshire and Peterborough Clinical Commissioning Group’s (CCG’s) contract with UnitingCare LLP. NHS England confirms that its review will look at the role of the Strategic Projects Team and the advice that it gave to the CCG. NHS England advises that it has commissioned an independent review, so the Strategic Projects Team’s role can be considered objectively.

Health Services: Cambridgeshire

Lord Hunt of Kings Heath: To ask Her Majesty’s Government how they will ensure that their review of the Cambridgeshire and Peterborough Clinical Commissioning Group contract with UnitingCare LLP for older people's and adult community services will deal objectively with the role of the Department of Health and NHS England, in the light of the fact that both organisations undertook Gateway reviews of the contract proposals.

Lord Hunt of Kings Heath: To ask Her Majesty’s Government why the Department of Health gateway final report regarding the contact between UnitingCare LLP and the Cambridgeshire and Peterborough Clinical Commissioning Group (CCG) made no recommendations about the need to ensure that the business case was fully in-line with the accepted bid by UnitingCare LLP to run older people's and adult community services for that CCG.

Lord Hunt of Kings Heath: To ask Her Majesty’s Government whether the gateway reviews into the Cambridgeshire and Peterborough Clinical Commissioning Group (CCG) contract with UnitingCare LLP for older peoples' and adult community services reconciled the financial plans of the CCG with those of UnitingCare.

Lord Prior of Brampton: NHS England is responsible for the review of Cambridgeshire and Peterborough clinical commissioning group’s (CCGss) contract with UnitingCare LLP. NHS England advises that it has commissioned an independent review to ensure objectivity. The review is looking at the contract from a commissioning perspective, which means it will cover the role of NHS England, but the role of the Department is not within its scope. The Department’s role in gateway reviews was to facilitate the review on behalf of the project owner. The procedure was that the Department’s Health Gateway Team, working with the project owner, selected a suitable review team from a pool of accredited, independent reviewers. At the end of the review, the independent review team produced a report which was presented to the project owner and was their property. The Department stopped providing this service in 2015. NHS England advises that the CCG, as the project owner, used the Department’s Health Gateway Team to facilitate three independent gateway reviews into its procurement for older people's and adult community services, two in 2013 before the submission of final bids and the third in November 2014. NHS England advises that these gateway reviews were not intended to undertake detailed financial reconciliation. NHS England advises that it facilitated two gateway reviews in early 2014, before the appointment of the preferred bidder. These focused on reviewing significant service changes from a clinical pathway perspective. They were not intended to cover procurement and technical financial details.

Strategic Projects Team

Lord Hunt of Kings Heath: To ask Her Majesty’s Government which procurement projects in which the Strategic Projects Team has been involved have been suspended pending the review of the Cambridgeshire and Peterborough Clinical Commissioning Group contract with UnitngCare LLP for older people's and adult community services.

Lord Hunt of Kings Heath: To ask Her Majesty’s Government what steps they are taking to strengthen the transparency and governance arrangements of the NHS Strategic Projects Team.

Lord Prior of Brampton: We are advised that NHS England is awaiting finalisation of its review of the Cambridgeshire and Peterborough Clinical Commissioning Group contract with UnitingCare LLP before considering what action might be required with regard to the Strategic Projects Team.We understand that NHS England will not be making any commitments on any other current procurements until the review is complete and NHS England has had time to consider the findings.

General Dental Council

Lord Hunt of Kings Heath: To ask Her Majesty’s Government whether they have any plans to review the effectiveness of the leadership and governance arrangements of the General Dental Council.

Lord Prior of Brampton: The Department continues to take a keen interest in how the General Dental Council (GDC) is performing and its performance against the Professional Standards Authority’s good standards of regulation. It is encouraging that the GDC is working hard to improve, however more is required to strengthen its performance.

Social Services: North East

Baroness Armstrong of Hill Top: To ask Her Majesty’s Government what proportion of people receiving social care in each of the seven authorities in the Northeast Local Economic Partnership area are entitled to public funding to support that care.

Lord Prior of Brampton: The following table contains estimates of the proportion of residential social care service users in each of the seven authorities in the Northeast Local Economic Partnership area who are in receipt of public funding.  Local AuthorityApproximate proportion who are state supportedDurham71%Gateshead69%Newcastle upon Tyne64%North Tyneside61%Northumberland69%South Tyneside89%Sunderland67%Total70%  This information is an estimate based on internal analysis derived from the National Adult Social Care Intelligence Service and Care Quality Commission occupancy data for residential social care – data is not available for domiciliary care. This estimate uses 2012/13 data, which provides the most recent comparable data sets for this purpose.

Vaccination

Baroness Greengross: To ask Her Majesty’s Government what plans they have to carry out a review of incentives and reimbursement for the delivery of routine immunisation programmes.

Baroness Greengross: To ask Her Majesty’s Government what plans NHS England has to establish performance floors setting out minimum levels of vaccination coverage in different areas of the country, in line with the commitment in its Putting Patients First business plan.

Lord Prior of Brampton: NHS England has a specific role to commission those public health services set out in the Section 7A public health functions agreement 2016-17, including immunisation programmes and to hold to account providers to ensure that they deliver the contracts that have been agreed. The agreement sets out specific outputs and outcomes to be achieved by NHS England including performance indicators that outline minimum levels of vaccination coverage for different programmes. NHS England publishes national service specifications outlining the minimum levels of vaccinations expected, which in turn are put into contracts with providers at local level.   The Section 7A agreement requires NHS England to at least maintain, or improve, national levels of performance on existing services, while also implementing planned changes. It also includes an ambition to reduce local variation in performance between different geographical areas.There are no plans to review incentives, however a number are already in place. For example, within primary care general practitioner (GP) settings, some vaccination services such as flu for those with diabetes have quality outcome framework indicators attached, whereby GPs are rewarded for good practice. Also, as part of the contracts given outside of the primary care settings, local teams can develop Commissioning for Quality and Innovation payments that link a proportion of providers' income to the achievement of local quality improvement goals.

Vaccination

Baroness Greengross: To ask Her Majesty’s Government what actions (1) NHS England, and (2) Public Health England, are taking to improve levels of vaccination coverage of recommended vaccines for adults in areas with low levels of uptake.

Lord Prior of Brampton: Through the National Health Service public health functions agreement (S7A), NHS England commissions services from a variety of providers across England, and has a national service specification outlining the national standards and expectations. Immunisation programmes are delivered in partnership with Public Health England (PHE) and the Department, who use contracting and commissioning levers to reduce variation in local levels of performance between different geographical areas. In addition, organisations are working together on a number of priority programmes where there is variation, such as measles, mumps, and rubella to put in place effective actions for improvement. PHE works in partnership with NHS England and Directors of Public Health to ensure that local population needs are understood and addressed by local immunisation services, and with NHS England local teams to provide leadership and coordination to sustain and improve the successful delivery of existing programmes. PHE constantly monitors cases of vaccine preventable disease and levels of vaccine coverage.

Vaccination

Baroness Greengross: To ask Her Majesty’s Government what plans Public Health England has to issue guidance to healthcare professionals on the use of nationally procured vaccine stock.

Lord Prior of Brampton: Public Health England issues guidance to healthcare professionals on the use of nationally procured vaccine stock through chapter three of its publication, ‘Immunisation against infectious diseases’ titled ‘Storage, distribution and disposal of vaccines’. A copy is attached. 



Chapter Procured Vaccine Stock
(PDF Document, 132.25 KB)

Hepatitis

Lord Hunt of Kings Heath: To ask Her Majesty’s Government why special financial provision is having to be provided by the Department of Health, and not NHS England, for the treatment of people infected with hepatitis C through contaminated blood when the treatment of all patients is covered by mandated NICE guidance.

Lord Prior of Brampton: We are currently consulting on a number of proposals to reform the current payment schemes for those infected with HIV and/or hepatitis C through National Health Service-supplied blood/blood products. As part of that consultation, we are keen to hear views on whether those infected with hepatitis C and whose infections have yet to progress to advanced stages would be interested in receiving enhanced access to the new effective drugs sooner than is currently available to them on the NHS following publication of the latest National Institute of Health and Care Excellence (NICE) treatment guidance for hepatitis C. The NHS is prioritising access to the new treatments for all patients with hepatitis C on the basis of clinical need and not on the route of transmission. There are three NICE Guidance documents attached: 1. Ledipasvir–sofosbuvir;2. Daclatasvir; and3. Ombitasvir–paritaprevir–ritonavir with or without dasabuvir for treating chronic hepatitis C.



NICE GUIDANCE TA365
(PDF Document, 223.42 KB)




NICE GUIDANCE TA364
(PDF Document, 239.37 KB)




NICE GUIDANCE TA363
(PDF Document, 296.42 KB)

Medical Treatments

Lord Hunt of Kings Heath: To ask Her Majesty’s Government whether people continue to have the right to drugs and treatments that have been recommended by NICE technology appraisals for use in the NHS if their doctor says they are clinically appropriate.

Lord Prior of Brampton: Yes. The NHS Constitution for England affirms, “You have the right to drugs and treatments that have been recommended by the National Institute for Health and Care Excellence for use in the NHS, if your doctor says they are clinically appropriate for you”.

Medical Treatments

Lord Hunt of Kings Heath: To ask Her Majesty’s Government whether they support NHS England’s decision to penalise providers for treating patients when numbers breach levels designated for Operational Delivery Networks, even if that treatment is in accordance with NICE guidance.

Lord Prior of Brampton: NHS England is operationally independent, and it is for them to determine how best to deliver the objectives in the mandate to NHS England, as well as ensuring the best use of resources available to it. The National Institute for Health and Care Excellence (NICE) specifically requires Operational Delivery Networks (ODNs) to prioritise hepatitis C patients on the basis of clinical need, as part of a progressive rollout of treatments over the next five years. NHS England is funding providers to treat patients at the rate outlined in NICE’s guidance, apportioned to local ODNs based on local health needs. NHS England has invested in a Commissioning for Quality and Innovation scheme to incentivise ODNs to meet their agreed rate of roll-out. If their treatment rates deviate from this agreed rate of treatment, they are no longer eligible for these incentives.

Scarlet Fever: Children

The Marquess of Lothian: To ask Her Majesty’s Government what action they are taking to prevent the rise in cases of scarlet fever in children.

Lord Prior of Brampton: Public Health England (PHE) has endeavoured to keep healthcare professionals, schools and the general public informed of the increased incidence of scarlet fever through timely information, news stories and updates on the PHE website and by using social and other media. These awareness raising measures assist general practitioners and other frontline healthcare professionals in reaching a correct diagnosis more quickly and encourage patients to seek medical advice early so that suspected cases receive prompt antibiotic treatment to reduce the risk of complications and limit further transmission. Guidelines have been developed by PHE to assist local Health Protection Teams in controlling outbreaks in schools, nurseries and childcare settings. In addition, investigations are underway to explore the possible reasons for the rise in scarlet fever and the impact on patients.

Down's Syndrome

Lord Shinkwin: To ask Her Majesty’s Government what (1) recent discussions they have had, and (2) consultation they have conducted, with (a) people with Down’s Syndrome, (b) families of people with Down’s Syndrome, and (c) Down’s Syndrome advocacy groups, about the National Screening Council’s recommendation that the NHS should offer a non-invasive prenatal testing technique, which could result in more abortions on the grounds of a Down’s Syndrome diagnosis; and whether they will publish any such consultation responses, and if so, when.

Lord Shinkwin: To ask Her Majesty’s Government what assessment they have made of the findings of the RAPID study into cell-free DNA, non-invasive prenatal testing techniques, which projects that a further 102 babies with Down’s Syndrome will be detected every year if the screening is implemented; and what assessment they have made of the impact of such screening on the percentage of babies with a Down's Syndrome diagnosis which is aborted, and of the prospective annual increase in the number of such abortions resulting from those detections.

Lord Shinkwin: To ask Her Majesty’s Government what estimate they have made of the increase, if any, in abortions for disability of implementing new non-invasive prenatal testing techniques.

Lord Shinkwin: To ask Her Majesty’s Government what assessment they have made of the impact of cell-free DNA, non-invasive prenatal testing techniques on (1) the medical profession’s, and (2) society's, attitudes towards people with Down’s Syndrome.

Lord Shinkwin: To ask Her Majesty’s Government what assessment they have made of the impact of non-invasive prenatal testing techniques for Down’s Syndrome on the Down’s Syndrome community in the light of the percentage of abortions that take place on the grounds of a Down’s Syndrome diagnosis.

Lord Prior of Brampton: The UK National Screening Committee (UK NSC) commissioned a full review of the published scientific and cost evidence (systematic review) relating to Non Invasive Prenatal Testing (NIPT). Based on the evidence from the systematic review and the pilot study, the UK NSC ran a three month consultation that closed on 30 October 2015 seeking views on whether NIPT be offered as an additional test to women identified with a higher risk of carrying a baby with a chromosomal condition. The consultation was sent directly to 38 organisations and responses were received from 30 stakeholders. Details of the evidence recommendation can be found in the document titled, ‘cfDNA Systematic Review Final Report.’ Details of the organisations contacted can be found in Annex A of the document titled, ‘cfDNA Cover Sheet’ and consultation responses can be found in the document titled, ‘Screening for cfDNA Compiled Comments.’ All three documents were published on the UK NSC website and copies are attached. The UK NSC review included the early findings from the Reliable Accurate Prenatal non-Invasive Diagnosis study. However, the possible introduction of NIPT for Down’s, Patau’s and Edwards’ syndromes to the National Health Service foetal anomaly screening programme does not fundamentally alter the choices presented to prospective parents regarding entering the foetal anomaly screening programme or not, or in options and choices available when testing identifies a foetus with a syndrome. Therefore, no assessment was made of the impact of NIPT on the number of abortions, Down’s Syndrome community and medical professional and society's attitudes towards people with Down’s syndrome. As NIPT for Down’s, Patau’s and Edward’s syndromes is giving more accurate information than women already get, the UK NSC does not consider it to raise any new ethical issues. However, the Nuffield Council on Bioethics held a workshop in January 2016 to consider the ethical aspects of introducing NIPT. 



Compiled comments
(PDF Document, 1.39 MB)




Final Report
(PDF Document, 3.64 MB)




Cover sheet
(PDF Document, 553.42 KB)

Pregnancy: Screening

Lord Shinkwin: To ask Her Majesty’s Government what assessment they have made of the National Screening Council’s recommendation that the NHS should offer non-invasive prenatal testing techniques in the light of (1) the UK’s obligations under the UN Convention on the Rights of Persons with Disabilities, and (2) the Equalities Act 2010 protection of disabled people from unjustified discrimination on grounds of disability.

Lord Shinkwin: To ask Her Majesty’s Government what action they are taking to ensure that the UK complies with its obligations under the UN Convention on the Rights of Persons with Disabilities if cell-free DNA, non-invasive prenatal testing techniques are made available to pregnant women on the NHS.

Lord Shinkwin: To ask Her Majesty’s Government what steps they are taking to fulfil their obligations under the UN Convention on the Rights of Persons with Disabilities, and in particular Article 23, subsection 3.

Lord Prior of Brampton: There is a long established Fetal Anomaly Screening Programme that prospective parents can choose whether to participate in. The United Kingdom National Screening Committee recommendation on non-invasive prenatal testing does not change the choices available to prospective parents within the programme. We are satisfied that the UK is compliant with its obligations under the United Nations Convention on the Rights of Persons with Disabilities and that the Programme is compliant with all obligations under the Equality Act 2010. We would also note that English law does not recognise a foetus as a separate legal person.

Health Professions: Vacancies

Lord Turnberg: To ask Her Majesty’s Government what assessment they have made of the observations of the National Audit Office that there was a 7.2 per cent shortfall in nursing, midwifery and health visitor staffing levels in 2014.

Lord Prior of Brampton: The Department has set up Health Education England (HEE) to plan the future healthcare workforce for England. They are responsible for ensuring a secure workforce supply that reflects the needs of local service users, providers and commissioners of healthcare. There are already over 50,000 nurses in training. HEE has increased adult nurse training places by 14% over the last two years. HEE has also increased midwifery training places by 1.6% in the last 12 months and have confirmed their intention to maintain that number of places in 2017-18. In addition to funding nurses through undergraduate training, HEE is running a return to practice campaign to attract nurses back to the National Health Service. This initiative has already yielded an additional 779 nurses available for employment now.

Human Embryo Experiments

Lord Alton of Liverpool: To ask Her Majesty’s Government, further to the Written Answer by Lord Prior of Brampton on 7 March (HL6225) and the letter from the Chief Executive of the Human Fertilisation and Embryology Authority (HFEA) to both Lord Alton and the Department of Health on 7 March, which specific members of the HFEA Licence Committee decided to overrule the HFEA's appointed peer reviewers; which particular points raised by the peer reviewers were considered to be irrelevant by the Licence Committee; and which of the peer reviewers’ comments that were not considered to be irrelevant were also not considered by the Licence Committee to be addressed by the person responsible.

Lord Prior of Brampton: The considerations and decision of the Licence Committee of this application are set out in the Licence Committee minutes, which are attached. The Human Fertilisation and Embryology Authority has advised that it does not provide additional commentary on the Licence Committee’s reasoning beyond those set out in the minutes.



Licence Committee Minutes
(PDF Document, 282.77 KB)

Dairy Products

Baroness Byford: To ask Her Majesty’s Government whether they support Public Health England's decision to reduce the dairy food group in the revised Eatwell Guide; whether the dairy industry was consulted before that change was made; and on what scientific basis that decision was taken.

Lord Prior of Brampton: The Government has adopted the refreshed Eatwell Guide which reflects updated government dietary recommendations based upon conclusions from the Scientific Advisory Committee on Nutrition, robust modelling and consumer research. It shows the proportions of the different types of foods and drinks we should consume to have a healthy, balanced diet. No individual organisation was consulted as part of this refresh. An external reference group informed the development of the Eatwell Guide. Representatives from the health sector, voluntary sector and industry groups including membership, trade and levy organisations (including ones representing agricultural sectors), were members and provided routes of engagement. Outside of the reference group involvement, 25 individuals/organisations commented directly to Public Health England. Linear programming, considered the most objective and robust approach by the reference group, informed the sizes of the food group segments, ensuring all government dietary recommendations, including that for calcium, were met.

Slaughterhouses: Veterinary Services

Baroness Byford: To ask Her Majesty’s Government what is (1) the average hourly rate, and (2) the range of charges, for official veterinary surgeons employed in abattoirs.

Lord Prior of Brampton: In 2014/15 the Food Standards Agency’s (FSA) full cost normal time hourly charge rate for an Official Veterinarian (OV) in Great Britain was £37.30. Discounts are applied to FSA charges and as a consequence the average hourly rate of charge for an OV was £16.81. The range of normal time hourly rates charged for FSA OVs in Great Britain in 2014/15 was £0.00 to £37.30.

Medical Records: Databases

Lord Freyberg: To ask Her Majesty’s Government whether any plans for a database of outcomes from innovative medical treatments will be subject to the patient level extraction process of the Standardisation Committee for Care Information.

Lord Prior of Brampton: The Access to Medical Treatments (Innovations) Bill, which has passed through all Parliamentary stages and is awaiting Royal Assent, provides a power to the Secretary of State for Health to direct the Health and Social Care Information Centre to; design, build and operate a database of innovative medicines which clinicians may wish to consider helping their patients gain access to, which will be implemented using internationally standardised medical coding.

Medical Records: Data Protection

Lord Freyberg: To ask Her Majesty’s Government when they plan to publish a response to their consultation on accredited safe havens, Protecting personal health and care data: a consultation on proposals to introduce new regulations, which closed on 8 August 2014.

Lord Prior of Brampton: The Department received 278 responses to the 2014 consultation Protecting personal health and care data, but was unable to publish the Coalition Government’s response to that consultation before the 2015 election.The consultation set the clear ambition to move as quickly as possible to a future state where:- the Health and Social Care Information Centre (HSCIC) is the place for holding identifiable health and care information at the national level;- access to data is more automated so that routine functions, including many commissioning functions, do not require access to identifiable data; and- consent is used more widely as the means for sharing identifiable information.Analysis of consultation responses demonstrated no obvious consensus about the function, purpose, number and controls required for Accredited Safe Havens (ASHs) to operate. Since the 2014 consultation, HSCIC, working with NHS England, local government, Public Health England and other key stakeholders has committed to the delivery of the future state within two years, without the need for interim ASHs. Delivery of these functions by HSCIC has the added benefits of:- increasing the likelihood of the public that there are robust protections and safeguards in place for their health and care data and information and;- reducing the need for the health and care system to use identifiable data as a basis for delivering their functions.The Government has concluded that the focus should be on supporting the HSCIC and NHS England in taking forward the future state as soon as possible. This will address the need to support integration and, in the longer term, to ensure flexibility is built in to reflect future priorities and also developments in technology and data.In September 2015, The Secretary of State for Health commissioned the Care Quality Commission to undertake a review of data security in the National Health Service, and in parallel commissioned Dame Fiona Caldicott, the National Data Guardian, to undertake an independent review of data security and consent, to:- Develop new data security standards;- Devise a method of testing compliance with the new standards, and;- Propose a new consent/opt-out model for data sharing.The National Data Guardian’s independent review will report shortly and the government will consult on the recommendations and respond to them in due course.

National Food Crime Unit

Baroness Jones of Whitchurch: To ask Her Majesty’s Government how many prosecutions of criminal gangs in the food sector have been initiated by the National Food Crime Unit since it was established.

Baroness Jones of Whitchurch: To ask Her Majesty’s Government what proportion of the National Food Crime Unit's annual budget is allocated to investigating serious crimes.

Lord Prior of Brampton: The National Food Crime Unit (NFCU) is initially focusing on establishing the scale and nature of food crime in the United Kingdom at a strategic level through developing intelligence sharing relationships across the law enforcement community and with the food industry. This will also enable the Unit to instigate investigative interventions by law enforcement partners and local authorities to identify and disrupt specific instances of food crime. The NFCU’s budget is directed towards fulfilling this primary intelligence function. Intelligence analysts within the Unit have just completed the first ever Food Crime Annual Strategic Assessment (FCASA), which will be published soon. The FCASA sets out the Unit’s developing understanding of food crime in the UK and will drive its work to ensure resources are focused where the threat to consumers and other interests is the greatest. At the end of this year, the Food Standards Agency will review progress on food crime, in line with Professor Elliott’s recommendations following the horsemeat incident. This review will inform decision-making about the Unit’s future form and function.

Pharmacy

Lord Mawhinney: To ask Her Majesty’s Government how information is (1) collected, and (2) managed, to protect the dignity of patients who receive pharmacy services in retail outlets, under the Standards for registered pharmacies, Principle 1.

Lord Mawhinney: To ask Her Majesty’s Government how information is (1) collected, and (2) managed, to protect the privacy of patients who receive pharmacy services in retail outlets, under Standards for registered pharmacies, Principle 1.

Lord Mawhinney: To ask Her Majesty’s Government how information is (1) collected, and (2) managed, to protect the confidentiality of patients who receive pharmacy services in retail outlets, under Standards for registered pharmacies, Principle 1.

Lord Prior of Brampton: Pharmacy owners and superintendent pharmacists of bodies corporate are responsible for meeting the General Pharmaceutical Council’s standards for registered pharmacies and must decide how best to do so, including managing information to protect the privacy, dignity and confidentiality of patients and the public, within their pharmacies. There are a number of different ways in which pharmacy professionals and the wider pharmacy team may receive patient information. Information is included on prescriptions, or may be shared by patients when seeking care from a pharmacy. In addition, information may be stored in patient medication records or other records. Through its inspections, the General Pharmaceutical Council seeks assurance from the pharmacy team about how they maintain the confidentiality, privacy and dignity of patients and the public. These assurances can be provided through a number of different means, for example restricted password access to patient information, appropriate training of staff or making sure patients can have conversations with members of the pharmacy team in private. All National Health service providers, including community pharmacies, also need to provide information governance assurances to the NHS on an annual basis.

Pregnancy: Screening

Lord Shinkwin: To ask Her Majesty’s Government what assessment they have made of the possible effects of normalising cell-free DNA, non-invasive prenatal testing techniques, in particular with regard to enabling sex-selective abortions.

Lord Shinkwin: To ask Her Majesty’s Government whether they will take steps to ensure that the issues highlighted in the Parliamentary Inquiry into Abortion on the Grounds of Disability of 2013, and in particular the finding that many parents are steered towards abortion and feel that they do not receive adequate information about other options, are not exacerbated by the introduction of cell-free DNA, non-invasive prenatal testing techniques.

Lord Prior of Brampton: There is a long established Fetal Anomaly Screening Programme (NHS FASP) that prospective parents can choose whether to participate in. The UK National Screening Committee recommendation on non-invasive prenatal testing (NIPT) does not change the choices available to prospective parents within the NHS FASP. Guidance from the Royal College of Obstetricians and Gynaecologists makes it clear that women and their partners should receive appropriate information and support from a properly trained multidisciplinary team, who must adopt a supportive and non-judgemental approach. NIPT testing as part of the NHS FASP will not be used to determine the sex of the foetus. Abortion on the grounds of gender alone is illegal.

Down's Syndrome

Lord Shinkwin: To ask Her Majesty’s Government how much has been invested in the last year in (1) Down’s Syndrome research, (2) Down’s Syndrome screening, and (3) support for people with Down’s Syndrome.

Lord Prior of Brampton: The information requested on total investment in Down’s syndrome research is not available. Spend on research funded directly by the National Institute for Health Research (NIHR) is categorised by Health Research Classification System (HRCS) health categories including ‘congenital disorders’. There are no HRCS health sub-categories, such as for Down’s syndrome or other specific syndromes. To obtain how much the National Health Service invested in Down’s syndrome screening in the last year would incur a disproportionate cost. Data on how much has been invested in the last year on support for people with Down’s syndrome is not held centrally.

Down's Syndrome

Lord Shinkwin: To ask Her Majesty’s Government what steps they are taking to support individuals with Down’s Syndrome and their families.

Lord Prior of Brampton: There is support available for families with children born with Down’s syndrome. For many people this will involve an early intervention programme, to help support the child’s development and provide support to the family. This support will be delivered by health visitors and midwives. An early intervention programme can include speech and language therapy, physiotherapy to help with any muscle weakness, and individual home teaching programmes. Where a child has a special educational need, the local authority should also make support available to ensure the child has access to the same educational opportunities as a child without such a need. The Children and Families Act 2014 introduced a statutory framework for local authorities and clinical commissioning groups (CCGs), to work together to secure services for children and young people up to the age of 25 who have special educational needs or disability. General practitioners can provide an annual learning disability health check. Children and young people aged 14 and over who are on a general practice’s learning disability register are eligible to have a health check and a health action plan linked to this check. The health check and health action plan can inform a local authority’s annual review of young people with special educational needs from age 14 onwards to help them to prepare for adult life. The Care Act 2014 requires local authorities to undertake an assessment when an adult appears to have care and support needs. The assessment must involve the adult, their carer and anyone else they want to involve and consider the outcomes the person wants to achieve, their needs and how these impact on their wellbeing.

NHS: Research

Lord Willis of Knaresborough: To ask Her Majesty’s Government, in the light of the Department of Health mandate to NHS England, which requires it to "ensure that the new commissioning system promotes and supports participation by NHS organisations and NHS patients in research funded by both commercial and non-commercial organisations", what progress has been made in achieving that objective, and how they record such progress.

Lord Prior of Brampton: The Department formally holds NHS England to account on its delivery against the research objective in the NHS Mandate, a process which will be rolled forward during 2016/17. Progress has been made in the areas of participation of National Health Service organisations in research, with 98% of NHS trusts recruited into National Institute for Health Research Clinical Research Network Portfolio studies during the course of 2014/15, and 78% of NHS trusts recruiting to commercial contract studies in the same year. In addition, recruitment of participants into such studies increased in 2014/15 compared to the previous year to 618,453 participants. Recruitment into commercial contract studies is at an all-time high, with 34,885 participants in 2014/15; a 35% increase from 2013/14.

Health Professions: Apprentices

Lord Willis of Knaresborough: To ask Her Majesty’s Government what consideration they have given to involving appropriate regulators in the development of degree-level apprenticeships for nursing and other allied health professionals.

Lord Prior of Brampton: Apprenticeship standards focus on the knowledge, skills and behaviours required to enable an apprentice to demonstrate mastery of an occupation and, as such, must meet professional registration requirements in sectors where these exist at the relevant level. The Nursing and Midwifery Council are involved in the development of the Degree Nurse Apprenticeship Standard and will formally be invited to become a member of the Nursing Trailblazer Group.

Nurses: Training

Lord Willis of Knaresborough: To ask Her Majesty’s Government what assessment they have made of the prospective impact on the education and training of Registered Nurses of the UK leaving the EU.

Lord Prior of Brampton: No work has been undertaken to determine what impact the United Kingdom leaving the European Union would have on the education and training of registered nurses.

Hospitals: Waiting Lists

Lord Hunt of Kings Heath: To ask Her Majesty’s Government what assessment they have made of the accuracy of official figures of the number of patients waiting for treatment for more than a year.

Lord Hunt of Kings Heath: To ask Her Majesty’s Government what assessment they have made of the report by the Health Service Journal that the number of patients waiting for treatment for more than a year is over 50 per cent higher than official NHS Executive data.

Lord Hunt of Kings Heath: To ask Her Majesty’s Government why nine trusts have not reported a figure for the number of patients waiting for treatment for more than a year even though the figures were available in their own board papers or commissioners’ boards’ papers.

Lord Hunt of Kings Heath: To ask Her Majesty’s Government why figures for the Barking, Havering and Redbridge NHS University Hospitals Trust were not included in the official figures of the number of patients waiting for treatment for more than a year.

Lord Prior of Brampton: Consultant-led referral to treatment waiting time statistics are designated as National Statistics. This means that the statistics are produced according to sound methods, and are managed impartially and objectively in the public interest. From time to time, for example when there are serious problems with patient administration systems, National Health Service trusts do need to temporarily suspend submissions of data for inclusion in the publication of National Statistics for reasons of data quality and completeness. Nine acute trusts did not submit data on referral to treatment waiting times for January 2016. For this reason, the published data on the number of patients waiting more than a year to start consultant-led treatment for non-urgent conditions may be understated. NHS Improvement is working intensively with these trusts so that they can begin submitting data again as quickly as possible.